A report out of the Far East early Thursday claims that Apple has decided on its lineup of component suppliers for the fifth-generation iPhone and second-generation iPad -- both of which will reportedly obtain baseband chips from CDMA inventor Qualcomm.

Rumors that Apple would dump Infineon chipsets in future versions of the iPhone began nearly a year ago when it was reported that Apple and Qualcomm met to discuss "future cooperation." Those sentiments were echoed once again, this time just three weeks ago when the Commercial Times pointed at Qualcomm-based iPhone 5.

Known largely as the inventor of CDMA -- the cellular standard behind the wireless networks of Verizon and Sprint -- Qualcomm has said it plans to produce dual-carrier chips that would enable future phones to work on both CDMA/EVDO carriers like Verizon and Sprint, as well as rival 3GPP carriers that use UMTS/HSPA+ technology like AT&T and T-Mobile.

Though the latest report Thursday by Taipei's Economic Daily News does not insinuate that the alleged Qualcomm design win will lead to a CDMA (Verizon or Sprint) iPhone, there have been other anecdotal pieces of evidence to that end, like AppleInsider's discovery of a cryptic "iPhone developer guru" job posting on the Qualcomm website in August.

Meanwhile, that same report also claims knowledge of over a half-dozen other iPhone 5 and iPad 2 component suppliers -- many of which have remained the same. They include: CPU from Samsung, Wi-Fi chip from Marvell, Flash memory from Intel, touch screen controller by Broadcom, audio chip from Wolfson, video display interface chip from National Semiconductor/Infineon, Bluetooth from CSR and power management from TI.

Hopefully this dispels the iPhone-Verizon rumors for January 2011. The timing of the Qualcomm hire and just the re-engineering required to make the chip fit and work points to a late Spring/Summer unveiling in either the iPhone or iPad.

I AM curious though about that "video processor" from National Semi/Infineon. I thought video was handled by the PowerVR core integrated into the A4 SoC. So what is this video processor they are referring to???

I AM curious though about that "video processor" from National Semi/Infineon. I thought video was handled by the PowerVR core integrated into the A4 SoC. So what is this video processor they are referring to???

I went back and re-checked the translation. This should be more accurate:

Qualcomm has to produce dual capable chip sets or they will become obsolete. Without 3GPP carriers that use UMTS/HSPA+ technology like AT&T and T-Mobile Qualcomm will slowly disappear and force Sprint and even Verizon to switch over to UMTS/HSPA+ as their solution.

Qualcomm has to produce dual capable chip sets or they will become obsolete. Without 3GPP carriers that use UMTS/HSPA+ technology like AT&T and T-Mobile Qualcomm will slowly disappear and force Sprint and even Verizon to switch over to UMTS/HSPA+ as their solution.

Total BS.

Qualcomm makes HSPA chips because they can make a lot of money. All the OTHER companies got obsolete as Qualcomm became the largest mobile technology company in the world.

The funny thing is that most of the GSM androids got Qualcomm chipsets and most of the Verizon androids got non-Qualcomm chipsets.

Dual carrier chip sets make sense and probably are the way to go as far as cutting production costs. Meanwhile, nine months to go and suppliers to come and go as features in the IPHONE5 are deleted & added.

I wouldn't be surprised if iPad 2.0 gets a CDMA option in January. Verizon's CEO is going to deliver a keynote speech at CES in January, and this would be a big enough deal for him to talk about. Bigger than whatever Android tablets they might have by then.

A CDMA iPad announcement in January would be a relatively safe and sane way to introduce Verizon into the mix. No contract, only a minimal amount of lock-in. And it would help build hype for a CDMA iPhone, if it were to be released next summer.

It just seems wrong for Apple to waste time and effort to build an iPhone that uses an increasingly obsolescent technology. On the other hand, Apple could make huge short-term profits, adding new customers (and eyeballs on iAds) in the time that CDMA still has left. But can Apple work their way into the "safe haven for Android" that Verizon has become?

You call a feature that allows a single phone to work on any carrier in the world useless?

Get real! It's the Universal Phone!

And, It would not surprise me if it reduced the cost of an iPhone or iPad -- 1 SKU, Parts Inventory, production facility for all carrier solutions.

.

It technically is already a universal phone, GSM is used on 80% of networks worldwide (99.99% in Europe) and its also faster , if a Verizon phone came over here to the UK, it would not work, theres no CDMA networks over here.

Don't confuse your 199USD downpayment as the iPhone price. The real price is much higher. Price transparency is something we should all fight for. Results in less confusion.

Here in Norway there is a law that requires all phone ads to include the total price in addition to the subsidised price (is this what the tea party guys would call socialism? ;o). Most ads display the total in smaller letters but you'll always be able to compare. What is often hidden though is the fact that the "subsidising" contract may include a higher minute price than the cheapest contracts, so there are still some calculation to do.
Off-topic: I've ordered a new iPhone4 directly from the Apple Store at 830 USD - a bit expensive but I get a very cheap contract on Tele2 (no monthly fee, 7 cents a minute. 3G data is 28 USD a month for 1 GB but free until January 2011 - and you can end the contract or remove the 3G data anytime you want, no termination fee).

BTW the Sony Ericssson Experia X10 mini still sells with Android 1.6. The entry price (15 cents) + contract is 270 USD, and this for a year-old operating system and only 128 MB of memory. Of course, you get what you pay for...

A report out of the Far East early Thursday claims that Apple has decided on its lineup of component suppliers for the fifth-generation iPhone and second-generation iPad -- both of which will reportedly obtain baseband chips from CDMA inventor Qualcomm.

How would Far East know what Far West decides?

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

We can buy the device outright ... or pay less up-front by getting a subsidised handset with a contract.

A lot of expensive devices come with this choice. My car, for example.

C.

Well judging from the ...huh? from one poster when jfanning mentioned that not everyone can afford a 700USD iPhone - Yes. Some are confused. Since you in the UK do have price transparency for the iPhone it is natural that you are not confused with the real price of the iPhone.

In countries where you cannot buy a device outright without subsidies, you'll have to look harder to see the real costs. This leads to confusion as is apparent in many of the threads on this forum when it comes to iPhone pricing.

The Samsung Galaxy S is also £499 from carphone warehouse and it has less memory than the £499 iPhone 4 16GB, the Nokia N8 was preordering in Germany for 499.

Apple's pricing is quite competitive.

That wasn't the point was it? One poster seemed to question the 700USD price tag of the iPhone, when jfanning said not everyone can afford a 700USD phone.

Following the original point, these users wouldn't afford the Galaxy S or N8 either, but they could possibly afford the "plasticky Nokia" 5230 (Nuron in the US) touch smartphone for example. Or the even cheaper non-touch phones.

The 700USD phones are nice for us priviledged, not so nice for the rest. Hundreds of millions of people are very thankful for the creaky plasticky phone's. That has nothing to do with competitive pricing, but a lot more with the target markets and the reasons why plasticky phones exist alongside metal and glass phones.

That wasn't the point was it? One poster seemed to question the 700USD price tag of the iPhone, when jfanning said not everyone can afford a 700USD phone.

I was tempted to respond "huh" to jfanning's remark too, but not because I questioned the price of the phone. My reaction was based on jfanning's rather severe interpretation of the previous poster's words.

I was tempted to respond "huh" to jfanning's remark too, but not because I questioned the price of the phone. My reaction was based on jfanning's rather severe interpretation of the previous poster's words.

Good point. For the original: Sorry in advance if I misinterpreted the huh?-response. I guess we all see text with our own preconceptions. And naturally all of this has everything to do with the CDMA iPhone

Assuming you're serious (and you might not be), I will say that it's unlikely that a CDMA/GSM iPhone will be sold to GSM-based carriers. It's unlikely that any economies of scale will offset the CDMA royalty fees in every dual-band iPhone. Also, any extra costs would probably be paid mostly by the carriers, not Apple.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KingKuei

Hopefully this dispels the iPhone-Verizon rumors for January 2011. The timing of the Qualcomm hire and just the re-engineering required to make the chip fit and work points to a late Spring/Summer unveiling in either the iPhone or iPad.

There have been numerous reports on AI about a CDMA-based iPhone 4 coming in early 2011. Any Qualcomm hires may be to develop a small enough LTE-CDMA-UMTS "world" baseband, that it can fit in an iPhone.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer

Qualcomm has to produce dual capable chip sets or they will become obsolete. Without 3GPP carriers that use UMTS/HSPA+ technology like AT&T and T-Mobile Qualcomm will slowly disappear and force Sprint and even Verizon to switch over to UMTS/HSPA+ as their solution.

Not true, on three counts:

1. Verizon and Sprint aren't going to HSPA, but so-called "4G" technology. The CDMA carriers who went HSPA have sailed earlier; later adopters are doing 4G now.
2. Qualcomm has long made HSPA basebands, as noted earlier.
3. I can't think of a single country that has CDMA, but no GSM or UMTS. A CDMA/GSM iPhone is unnecessary with every single GSM carrier. The GSM capability makes it a "world" phone, in of itself.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jfanning

Quote:

Originally Posted by SockRolid

China Telecom's 75 million subscribers use a variant of CDMA. And I hear it's used in Korea and other Asian nations too. And I'm sure they're less blatantly lock-in oriented than Verizon.

Those countries also have GSM/UMTS networks, so adding CDMAone support wouldn't gain you any roaming advantage.

Roaming advantage? Maybe not. But a CDMA iPhone would create competitive advantage between carriers. That matters some; it can result in lower prices for iPhones, especially in countries like Japan, China, and the US, which currently are single-carrier.

As for roaming: Sure, there are some people who could travel to multiple countries worldwide, but most people in the Americas and Asia will usually travel within their own continent. Most countries in each of those continents have CDMA, especially in North America. So those who buy a CDMA iPhone, and know what they're doing, won't regret their purchase when it's time to travel.

I was tempted to respond "huh" to jfanning's remark too, but not because I questioned the price of the phone. My reaction was based on jfanning's rather severe interpretation of the previous poster's words.

Thompson

What severe interpretation?

They said

Quote:

o me it shows, Apple is in the driver's seat! And that's good for all of us!

Thanks, Apple and thanks to Stevo for making the nerdy engineer produce something usable and worthwhile...

This will be his greatest accomplishment. He is the ultimate liaison bwtn, albeit, gifted programmers/engineers and the end users!

Best

My interpretation is still correct. The majority of the worlds population cannot afford an iPhone, or Galaxy, or N8, or what every other US$700 priced phone you want to list. If it wasn't for these cheaper phones then these users wouldn't have any cellphones. So why should these people thank "Stevo" for making something worthwhile when it (and the others in the same price range) are useless to them?

Roaming advantage? Maybe not. But a CDMA iPhone would create competitive advantage between carriers. That matters some; it can result in lower prices for iPhones, especially in countries like Japan, China, and the US, which currently are single-carrier.

In a couple of countries, sure, but Apple doesn't seem to be having any issues selling a GSM/UMTS based unit in those countries now.

I heard from one person that the iPhone 4 in Finland is priced at US$936, and the N8 at US$650. That doesn't sound competitive to me.

Since today, the 16GB iPhone 4 is 589 (800USD) unlocked wihtout contract. 32GB is 689 (the 936USD). Competitiveness depends on the individual's criterias for what fueature's and functionalities they value and by how muchI guess.